Ron Paul fell just 152 votes short of victory in last weekend’s Iowa straw poll, but it was a long drop in terms of attention from media and political commentators.

Instead, observers in Iowa and nationally have coalesced around straw poll winner Michele Bachmann, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry as the front-runners in the Republican presidential field.

“I would be just really surprised if he has the kind of support that he would be a front-runner at caucus time,” said Mark Lundberg, the Republican Party chairman for Sioux County. “He’ll have a significant amount of support, but I’d be very surprised if he’s the winner of the caucuses.”

Bachmann won the straw poll with 28.6 percent of the vote, less than 1 percent ahead of Paul. There were nine names on straw poll ballots. Perry, who declared his candidacy that day, came in sixth based on write-in votes. Romney, who didn’t compete actively in the straw poll, placed seventh.

The divide between Paul’s success in the straw poll and the scant attention it’s garnered has chafed his campaign both nationally and here in Iowa.

“The story is that Ron Paul clobbered seven candidates, and was basically in a statistical dead heat for the win, and the media is trying to ignore that,” said David Fischer, vice chairman of Paul’s Iowa campaign.

Paul’s message is strongly libertarian, calling for smaller government, a scrapping of the nation’s current monetary policy and less military action abroad.

Those views undermine entrenched political and business interests and the media that have supported them, said Drew Ivers, Paul’s Iowa campaign chairman. That’s why he hasn’t gotten any respect, he said.

“He challenges the status quo,” Ivers said. “The political establishment, the banking establishment, the media establishment – all of which have a vested interest over decades of asserting that they’re in control and taking care of everything.”

Why has so much attention been focused on the trio of Bachmann, Romney and Perry? Bachmann makes the cut based on her straw poll win. The event is a party fundraiser with no formal bearing on the race, but is seen as a key measure of campaign organization.

Romney led in national polling before the straw poll. Perry is considered a major contender based on his repeated victories in a large state and his fundraising prowess.

Fiscal beliefs praised; other stances a turnoff

Despite the misgivings of the powerful, Ivers and others said that average Americans are catching onto Paul’s message.

The recession and financial crises of recent years have drawn attention to economic issues and brought fiscal arguments that Paul has long championed into focus, supporters said. The sputtering recovery and lingering economic uncertainty have made the point clear to people on the job and at the grocery store, they said.

Proof of the relevance of Paul’s message can be seen in the way other Republican campaigns have tapped into his views on government spending and deficits, Ivers said.

“Ron Paul’s message has been picked up by (Newt) Gingrich and by Romney and big time by Michele Bachmann,” he said. “She’s almost an echo of Ron Paul.”

Republican Party officials and experts on presidential politics agreed that Paul’s economic viewpoints have gained traction, but said other aspects of his candidacy seriously undermine his appeal to the Republican caucus and primary voters who will choose the next presidential nominee.

“He does excite and energize people who think like he does, but he takes some positions that would not be consistent with conservative Republicans,” said Stephen J. Wayne, a professor at Georgetown University and an expert on presidential politics.

“I think there is a perception that, one, Paul doesn’t speak for all the values that the Republican Party has, and, two, that he would not be electable in a general election,” Wayne said.

Paul’s libertarian views open a divide between himself and social conservatives on some issues, while his strict stance against military involvement abroad diverges from current Republican orthodoxy.

That was evident in a national debate last week, when candidate and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum challenged Paul for encouraging a policy of “respect” toward Iran and downplaying that country’s threat to the United States. “Iran is not Iceland, Ron,” Santorum told Paul from the debate podium.

Rob Taylor, the Republican Party chairman in Dallas County, called Paul’s foreign policy views a “deal breaker.”

“His viewpoints frankly are right on the verge of xenophobia, and that is not where the Republican Party is by any means,” Taylor said. “I saw more eyes roll Thursday night within the Republican base than I’ve seen in years based on his lack of performance at the debates.”

Paul’s campaign, however, defends the candidate’s opposition to militarism and interventionist foreign policy as an authentically Republican position, harkening back to stalwarts like President Dwight Eisenhower and presidential candidate Barry Goldwater.

“Ron Paul wants to get back to traditional foreign policy, not neoconservative foreign policy,” said national campaign chairman Jesse Benton.

Campaign says results show path to victory

Despite the brush-off from the media and the establishment, Benton remains bullish on Paul’s prospects in the Iowa caucuses, scheduled for Feb. 6.

Benton pointed toward Paul’s 2007 straw poll finish, when he came in fifth with 1,305 votes. Extrapolating from the spread between 2007 and this year at the straw poll, Benton suggested that in the caucuses his candidate could almost quadruple the nearly 12,000 votes he garnered last time – almost certainly putting him into contention for victory.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won the 2008 Iowa caucuses with 40,954 votes, about a third of those cast.

“We believe we can win 40,000 votes in the Iowa caucus or more,” Benton said. “That will make us extremely competitive and make us a major contender to win it all.”

Dennis Goldford, a Drake University professor and expert on the caucuses, said mainstream recognition for Paul’s campaign is stuck in a kind of chicken-and-egg conundrum. The press will take him seriously when he shows he’s able to expand his pool of supporters, but his pool of supporters may expand only with additional media attention.

“His supporters quite devotedly and intensely say he’s the man of the hour and the response has to be, ‘OK, show us,’ ” Goldford said. “And you show us by winning Republican primaries and caucuses.”Q. How would you change tax policy?

Ron Paul on the issues

Q. How would you change tax policy?

Eliminate the IRS, abolish income and corporate taxes, and greatly restrict the collection of any other tariff. “A minimalist approach to government and taxation places an obstacle to wars abroad and waste at home.” Axing income taxes would allow individuals more freedom to invest their earnings. Eliminating corporate taxes would encourage U.S. companies to invest their earnings back home. Those changes and others would promote economic recovery guided by the unfettered market.

Yes, subsidies take wealth from one group of individuals or businesses and funnel it to another group, undermining the free market. Farm subsidies and agricultural quotas should be eliminated. A free market determines fair prices.

Q. Under what circumstances would you begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan?

Troop withdrawals should begin immediately from both Afghanistan and Iraq. The wars are unconstitutional because they were never officially declared by Congress, and U.S. presence in the Middle East has increased hostility toward Americans. He has been a longtime opponent of aggressive wars and believes the U.S. should adopt a “foreign policy golden rule” – treat other countries as we’d like to be treated.

Q. Do you favor a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman? Or should that be a matter decided by each state?

Although he personally embraces the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, he thinks the issue is best addressed by the states – not the federal government. “This issue hardly justifies an amendment to the Constitution; passage or heated debate only serves to divide us and achieves nothing. The best approach is to make marriage a private issue.”

Q. Should abortion be legal under any circumstances? If so, under what circumstances?

He believes that the procedure is immoral, but that the government does not have the power to stop all abortions. He would veto any spending bill that contains funding for facilities that perform abortions, and has proposed legislation that would limit federal jurisdiction over abortion, leaving states to legislate the issue.